Commissioners weigh in on state wolf status review

Jana Mathia, Gazette Reporter | May 09, 20190

The current status and future planning for managing the wolf population was discussed Monday afternoon with a regional director from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife meeting with Whitman County Commissioners.

WDFW Region 1 Director Steve Pozzanghera spent nearly an hour with commissioners to update them on current wolf recolonization and collect comments from them on whether wolves should be considered for a change in listing status and modeling for future growth as part of the 2019 periodic status review for gray wolves.

“I don’t believe the wolf population in eastern Washington is anywhere near threatened or endangered anymore with the numbers you have,” said Commissioner Art Swannack near the end of the meeting.

Pozzanghera noted that county commissioners here varied in their responses while other counties had been more unanimous. WDFW is meeting with all county commissioners, and Pozzanghera has already had meetings with Stevens, Ferry and Pend Oreille counties.

Pozzanghera started the meeting off with background on WDFW’s role in producing reports for wolf status. Wolves are currently on the highest protection level in the state with the listing of endangered. He noted that any down-listing or delisting would be based solely on the basis of biological status and scientific data per WAC laws. The wolves may be down-listed or delisted when that data shows the population is no longer in danger of failing, declining or vulnerable or when recovery plan objectives are met.

The recovery goal is for four breeding pairs to be established in the three recovery zones.

“The problem is we have not met those goals in other regions,” Pozzanghera said, after giving the numbers.

The numbers show much higher wolf population in the east region than the other two.

Since the first pack was documented in Washington in 2008–a pack being two or more wolves in an established area–wolf numbers have grown every year, although the growth in 2018 was lower than previous years.

In 2017, WDFW documented 122 wolves in 22 packs with 14 successful breeding pairs. In 2018, there were 126 wolves in 27 packs with 15 successful breeding pairs. The numbers given are the minimum counts, not counting transients wolves or those who hunt in the state yet have dens out of state.

The east region holds 22 of the 27 packs and 12 of the 15 pairs. The other three pairs are in the north central area. One pack is west of the Cascade Mountains.

Swannack pointed out wolf counts are made at the lowest point of the population and these numbers are the minimum so there should be a clear understanding there are more.

Pozzanghera noted early on that no wolves were directly introduced into Washington state, but rather have moved here from Idaho, Montana, Canada and now Oregon.

When asked for their opinion on whether wolves should be considered seriously threatened with extinction within the state or should be considered for a change in status, the commissioners’ replies varied.

“My forefathers made them extinct in the state of Washington for a purpose,” Commissioner Dean Kinzer said. “They compete against, not only their livelihood, but against the fish and game.” He added that hunters have relayed there are no more deer and elk in areas due to the wolves. Kinzer felt the commissioners were fenced in on their replies because there was not an option to change state law to remove all protection and management from wolves.

Commissioner Michael Largent admitted to some conservationism in his blood that urged him to seek for a balance.

“I think there is a tough balance to draw,” he said.

Swannack confessed to being the most intimate with the topic since he was involved early on as a representative of the Washington State Sheep Producers on the wolf working group which created the draft wolf management and recovery plan for Washington state and has also been victimized as wolves have claimed several of his sheep and a guard dog. He was one of 17 different members of the wolf working group, including wolf advocates and various livestock and agricultural groups.

“I do believe the state needs to look at down listing,” he said, citing the numbers and data from other states.

“We’re running into conflict issues,” he said. His recommendation was for the commission to consider a zonal de-listing. He also supported translocation of wolves from the east district to the others.

Swannack also noted the habitat information needed to be updated in the modeling. When he worked on the original plan, there was the assumption wolves would remain in the forested area. However, they are finding wolves living in areas not expected like the scablands of Lamont where he lives.

Largent’s emphasis was on the modeling being conducted by those with the expertise to do it.

“I’d like to see it done by competent individuals who understand modeling,” he said in response to Pozzanghera’s questions of population modeling and what commissioners would like to see done as part of the modeling exercise.

Swannack wanted better information to reflect more accurately where wolves were located, what their numbers were and their impact.

“The better count we have, the better decision we make,” he said, to which Largent agreed.

Swannack also noted that people miss multiple factors in some reports, citing a recent report which had come under harsh criticism for assumptions made, and urged a neutral party be found for analysis.

“We are so dependent on expertise and cultivating that objective expertise that takes into consideration all the factors,” Largent said and expressed faith in the knowledge of WDFW staff and experts.

“Currently, I don’t see a place for them,” Kinzer said, noting the wolf issue had drained millions of dollars, hours and resources from the state.

Pozzanghera noted several times his goal was to get the comments and opinions of the county commissioners on how to proceed with the periodic statue review prior to public scoping, so no action was taken or introduced.